"Frank Saunders, MS-MVP OE/WM" <franksaunders@mvps.org> wrote in message
news
B22EA26-5BB8-4DCF-9C54-03AB746F50AC@microsoft.com...
> "Danny" <me@there.com> wrote in message
> news:Jagqh.52157$KT2.48988@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
>> And in fact I'm rather lost for words by it.
>>
>> With Outlook Express on XP, the email inbox, like all other folders, was
>> stored as a single chunk DBX file. It was not accessed when one opened OE
>> unless they had specifically chosen to do so.
>>
>> Put simply, this meant OE opened extremely quickly as it only opened the
>> shell of the program, and did not retrieve its guts unless the user went
>> there of their own volition.
>>
>> However, moving forward to Windows Mail and I can't quite believe the
>> backwards steps MS have taken here. Not only have they, in their wisdom,
>> converted the former DBX into an individual array of each message
>> individually saved as an eml file, but they have also (apparently) made
>> Windows Mail access this collection by default on opening the app (I can
>> see
>> no option to avoid this), and for those who have thousands of messages,
>> made
>> Windows Mail incredibly slow as a result.
>>
>> I am really hoping I am missing something massive here, because it seems
>> astonishing to me that MS felt this was a better and more efficient way
>> to
>> manage the email stores and email app than how OE did it.
>>
>> Can someone shed light on this?
>>
>
> The DBX storage format was extremely fragile and prone to loss of the
> entire
> messages store.
Not for me. I used the same individual DBX files for 8 years without a
single problem.
> The present storage is much more robust and much less apt
> to lose messages.
As mentioned, a moot point in my case.
> I find Windows Mail opening just about as quickly as
> Outlook Express but, as with OE, it's a good idea not to use the Inbox to
> archive your messages but to move them to other folders as you read them
> (or
> use rules to move them as they come in).
>
Appreciate the reply, but it seems to be formulated from the basis that OE
was faulty. For me it was not, in any way, shape or form.